latest battle to avoid Bermuda Regiment service.

Conscientious objector Mr. Attride-Stirling and his lawyer Mr. Ian Kawaley walked from the Court of Appeal with high hopes of victory.

"The court appeared to be with us,'' said Mr. Kawaley after defending his client's stance on constitutional grounds.

But neither Mr. Attride-Stirling nor Mr. Kawaley were ready to hoist the victory flag -- just yet.

"We don't want to preempt matters,'' Mr. Kawaley stressed.

The court yesterday reserved its decision on lawyer Mr. Attride-Stirling's appeal against last year's Supreme Court order that he serve in the Regiment in a non-combative role.

Chief Justice the Hon. Mr. Justice Ward had thrown out claims that Mr.

Attride-Stirling's constitutional rights had been violated.

Yesterday, however, Mr. Kawaley argued that Section 27 of the Defence Act -- which requires conscientious objectors to serve in the Regiment in non-combative roles -- clashed with the Bermuda Constitution.

The Constitution, said Mr. Kawaley, safeguarded the freedom of conscientious objectors to perform civilian duties outside the military services.

And the three appeal judges, through their questions and comments, appeared to agree there was inconsistency between the Defence Act and the Constitution.

Mr. Justice Harvey da Costa said: "It is clear Section 27 should be amended to bring it into line with the Constitution.'' Whatever the court decides, its ruling is expected to have widespread implications for Regiment recruitment.

It was in 1985 that Mr. Attride-Stirling was first selected by ballot for military service, but his training was deferred because he was a student abroad for many years.

On returning to Bermuda he had to present himself for medical examination and enlistment on October 6, 1992.

On October 5 he applied to the Exemption Tribunal to be excused from service as a conscientious objector.

The tribunal, however, recommended to the Governor that he should start boot camp, serving in non-combatant duties.

And Mr. Justice Ward agreed, ruling: "I have concluded that the requirement that the applicant should serve in a non-combatant role only is a provision which is reasonably required in the interest of defence.'' Yesterday Mr. Kawaley asked the appeal judges to make a declaration that Section 27, subsection 4 of the Defence Act, was "constitutionally void''.

He also called for a declaration that the Exemption Tribunal's recommendation violated constitutional rights.

And he wanted a ruling that his client should not have to do military service.

Mr. Kawaley, who is also claiming costs, told the court the Chief Justice had erred in law.

"The case is not about a clever, privileged lawyer seeking to evade civic responsibility,'' he said. "The appellant has been willing to perform alternative civilian service and merely objects to the military.'' He said Mr. Attride-Stirling was being treated differently from Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists who received privileges when enlisted.

"My client was not afforded the opportunity to be exempted. If he had been a Jehovah's Witness he would have had a much better chance.'' Mr. Kawaley said the case was not about whether the Regiment was "desirable or useful'' or not.

"We do not through these proceedings seek to in any way undermine the institution as a community institution.

"It is not about whether the court, Crown, counsel or indeed the majority of Bermudians find pacifism as a philosophy appealing or repugnant.'' Mr. Kawaley said the case was about whether the right of freedom of conscience as enshrined in the Bermuda Constitution should be given "real or merely token recognition''.

Crown Counsel Mr. Peter DeJulio said the Crown's initial position was that Section 27, subsection 4, of the Defence Act did not interfere with the appellant's rights.

Mr. DeJulio, citing legal authorities, said an individual's freedom in any society was never absolute.

Everybody must pay regard to the rights of others.

And Section 8 of the Bermuda Constitution, said Mr. DeJulio, recognised the interests of national defence.

"The court has to keep in mind the distinction between the situation in Bermuda and other democratic countries where conscription is no longer the law.

"Bermuda has a much smaller population than most other countries.'' Mr. DeJulio said one person not reporting for Regimental duty could make a difference.

"Every last man counts.''